Means-tested welfare costs shot above $1 trillion in FY2011

posted at 2:11 pm on October 18, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

How much spending does the US do on means-tested welfare programs? According to Senator Jeff Sessions and the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, it’s more than one would imagine. In FY2011 alone, federal and state spending on means-tested federal entitlement programs rose above $1 trillion — and that doesn’t include non-means-tested programs like Social Security and Medicare:

The government spent approximately $1.03 trillion on 83 means-tested federal welfare programs in fiscal year 2011 alone — a price tag that makes welfare that year the government’s largest expenditure, according to new data released by the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee.

The total sum taxpayers spent on federal welfare programs was derived from a new Congressional Research Service (CRS) report on federal welfare spending — which topped out at $745.84 billion for fiscal year 2011 — combined with an analysis from the Republican Senate Budget Committee staff of state spending on federal welfare programs (based on “The Oxford Handbook of State and Local Government Finance”), which reached $282.7 billion in fiscal year 2011. …

According to the CRS report, which focused solely on federal spending for federal welfare programs, spending on federal welfare programs increased $563.413 billion in fiscal year 2008 to $745.84 billion in fiscal year 2011 — a 32 percent increase.

Further, spending on the 10 largest federal welfare programs has doubled as a share of the federal budget in the last 30 years: In inflation-adjusted dollars, according to Republican staff on the Senate Budget Committee, the amount spent on these programs has increased 378 percent in that 30 year time frame.

CRS reports that food assistance programs — the third largest welfare category behind health and cash assistance — experienced the greatest increase in spending, with 71 percent more spending in 2011 than in 2008. The agency explained that this spending increase was largely due to the growth in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamps.

A few points should be kept in mind. We had a massive recession and job loss event between FY2008 and FY2011, which dramatically impacted both the accumulated wealth and incomes of middle- and working-class Americans. Under those conditions, one would expect to see short-term dramatic gains in programs like SNAP and Medicaid. Furthermore, part of this spending covers unemployment benefits, which Congress continually extended until the end of FY2011, meaning that the normal cycle of benefit payments got a lot longer and more expensive [see update below].

However, those problems should have been short term. In most economic downturns, jobs and wealth rebound fairly quickly, especially when the federal government acts to streamline regulation, reduce interference with energy costs, and provide long-term stability in tax and monetary policy. That’s how Ronald Reagan produced the generation-long boom of the 1980s from the double-dip recession that hit the US between 1980-81.

So what is to be done to get costs back in control? First, we need to look at the insanity of having 83 federal agencies handling means-tested welfare, and the costs associated with those bureaucracies overlapping and duplicating efforts. That could save some money, and more to the point, get the aid to where it’s truly needed. As the chart above shows, and as recent data on the dramatic erosion of median income also demonstrates, the need is not an illusion.

But what we really need to cut costs in these programs is to make them a lot less necessary than they are today for millions of Americans. That means putting in place the kind of regulatory, monetary, and tax reform necessary to produce a real, sustained recovery that will produce jobs and create wealth again for the working and middle classes. That means encouraging American energy production to lower energy costs while creating hundreds of thousands of high-paying jobs in oil and gas production and refining. That means that we need to quit worrying about class warfare and start worrying once again about upward mobility and innovation by making it attractive to put capital to work in the US.

Update: A source with knowledge of the data says that unemployment benefits were not included in this spending total — which, on reflection, makes sense, since unemployment is not a means-tested program.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Most Americans do not want government assistance. They want
jobs so they can afford to support their families.

I won’t even comment on the ones who live on the dole as a way
of life. They are losers.

Vote for Romney! Even if you disagree with him on other issues,
one must admit that the man is uniquely qualified to handle our
economic woes and job creation. Without a solid economy our nation is doomed. That is the number 1 issue and should be.

The economic groundswell that will coincide with a Romney victory will gladden many hearts. There is so much capital waiting for a Capitalist in the White House, we’ll all benefit from the rising tide…if you’ve got your boat shipshape.

The government spent approximately $1.03 trillion on 83 means-tested federal welfare programs in fiscal year 2011 alone — a price tag that makes welfare that year the government’s largest expenditure, according to new data released by the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee.

Any chance President Romney & Congress Republicans can have this gravy train stopped? Not likely, as I see it. The alternative is to turn all cities into riotous bloodbath. We are truly and deeply focked.

…and this is whta you get when the Senate Majority Leader abbrogates their only constitutional legislative responsibility – to pass a budget. 3yrs+ without one, so that already bloated budgets and the abomination that is baseline budgeting practices could be continued DESPITE a popular ouster of Democrat control of the House in 2010. An entire Congress term, the 112th, shall pass no Budget because of Democrat obstructionism so that they can maintain the egregious spending referenced in this topic. TO NO SUBSTANTIVE PURPOSE. Strictly for partisan vote buying. OUR money, OUR GRANDCHILDREN’S money, squandered on predominantly democrat parasites.

That is insane. In 2000 when Clinton’s Presidency was winding down, the entire budget was around $2 trillion total. Now we’re spending half that amount on welfare programs alone?!

Doughboy on October 18, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Just welfare. Does not include disability, but there is probably some uhhhh “overlap” (yeah that’s the word) between the programs.

Are gas stations, stores and restaurants closing where you are?

Can we call it a DEPRESSION NOW?

Why do people insist on calling this a “recovery?” I say BOLLICKS! When the stats the government puts out are blatantly and overtly FALSE, honest journalists and editorialists have a responsibility to stop using that term, don’t they?

I heard this on Rush today (which was awesome because I never have a chance to listen to Rush). The absolute worst part of this is that if this was all converted to cash from assistant items, poverty would be eliminated. INsteat…it’s $1.3T and poverty is increasing. Devastating.

I haven’t taken a dime in Welfare. I’ve never taken food stamps. Never taken unemployment checks. Never taken Medicare. Too young for Social Security. Same for state programs. But I’ve paid taxes for the last 40 years to pay for all of these.

I haven’t taken a dime in Welfare. I’ve never taken food stamps. Never taken unemployment checks. Never taken Medicare. Too young for Social Security. Same for state programs. But I’ve paid taxes for the last 40 years to pay for all of these.

Guess that makes me a sucker.

Socratease on October 18, 2012 at 2:36 PM

I’ve actually had working friends say the same thing to me. People are seeing this and now going in to apply thinking why not…

I haven’t taken a dime in Welfare. I’ve never taken food stamps. Never taken unemployment checks. Never taken Medicare. Too young for Social Security. Same for state programs. But I’ve paid taxes for the last 40 years to pay for all of these.

Guess that makes me a sucker.

Socratease on October 18, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Very profound. It is so simple…yet the spin from the Left on this issue is off the charts.

Update: A source with knowledge of the data says that unemployment benefits were not included in this spending total — which, on reflection, makes sense, since unemployment is not a means-tested program.

Another poster said most Americans don’t want government assistance. One can only hope that this is true but I fear we are perilously close to a tipping point where more people than not feel its “ok” to get their share of the gooberment pie without thinking about where that share is coming from (and how that gravy train simply cannot run forever).

And this is exactly what progressives want to see happen: a permanent majority dependent class.

Update: A source with knowledge of the data says that unemployment benefits were not included in this spending total — which, on reflection, makes sense, since unemployment is not a means-tested program.

I will prolly catch hell for this, but could we get a larger shot of that crowd in the welfare line. I seem to notice a constant trait that could be informative!

i notice they seem to be a bunch of fat assses that due to thier lazy attitutdes and lazy lives in general don’t get enough exercise.
drug test em and give em jobs pickin up sticks, cans,road kill or whatever. Something so they dont just lay around reproducing clones of themselves.

Another poster said most Americans don’t want government assistance. One can only hope that this is true but I fear we are perilously close to a tipping point where more people than not feel its “ok” to get their share of the gooberment pie without thinking about where that share is coming from (and how that gravy train simply cannot run forever).

And this is exactly what progressives want to see happen: a permanent majority dependent class.

natasha333 on October 18, 2012 at 3:00 PM

I’ve heard this from more people than I like. Some have told me to do likewise and get all I can from the government. I won’t. They don’t care one bit when I tell them where the government gets the money for their goodies.

There are moments when I ask myself “what the hell am I doing?” I know people on these programs living in a better house than I am, with all the latest gadgets, including iPhones and iPads that iAmPayingFor.

Any chance President Romney & Congress Republicans can have this gravy train stopped? Not likely, as I see it. The alternative is to turn all cities into riotous bloodbath. We are truly and deeply focked.
Archivarix on October 18, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Any chance President Romney & Congress Republicans can have this gravy train stopped? Not likely, as I see it. The alternative is to turn all cities into riotous bloodbath. We are truly and deeply focked.

Archivarix on October 18, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Cleombrotus on October 18, 2012 at 3:47 PM

We can’t turn it off overnight, but a program of awards for fraud reporting, work requirements, documentation requirements to prove income level, cross-check against adjacent states, and chasing down fraud will cut the numbers significantly from a trillion bucks.

Go to the Craigslist in any decent sized city and do a search on ‘food stamps’.

Heard Rush talking about this today.
His theory is that Obama won’t reveal what his 2nd term agenda is because if it was known, he would lose by a HUGE landslide.
Obama thinks the $1 Trillion we’re spending now is still not enough.

So do we all understand how the unemployment numbers a dropping even though people are not going back to work? Welfare. It’s what you get after the 2 years of the other checks stop.
–
I grew up surrounded by welfare families in the 60s. Some very poor parenting happen in those ‘stay at home mom’ households. It’s wastes lives when you hand people a check for being non-productive…
-